Skip to main content
Internet Archive's 25th Anniversary Logo

Full text of "Maximum Disk Mass Models for Spiral Galaxies"

See other formats


Accepted to the Astronomical Journal 

Preprint typeset using LAT^^ style cniulatcapj v. 21/08/00 



O 
O 

o 



a^ 
o 
o 
o 

6 



% 



MAXIMUM DISK MASS MODELS FOR SPIRAL GALAXIES 

POVILAS PALUNAS^'^ 
Laboratory for Astronomy & Solar Physics, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771 

palunas@gsfc.nasa.gov 

T.B. Williams^ 

Department of Physics and Astronomy, Rutgers, The State University, Box 0849 Piscataway, NJ 08855-0849 

williams@physics.rutgers.edu 
Accepted to the Astronomical Journal 

ABSTRACT 

We present axisymmetric maximum disk mass models for a sample of 74 spiral galaxies taken from 
the southern sky Fabry-Perot TuUy-Fisher survey (Schommer et al. 1993). The sample contains galaxies 
spanning a large range of morphologies and having rotation widths from 180 km s^^ to 680 km s^^. For 
each galaxy we have an J-band image and a two dimensional Ha velocity field. We decompose the disk 
and bulge by fitting models directly to the /-band image. This method utilizes both the distinct surface 
brightness profiles and shapes of the projected disk and bulge in the galaxy images. The luminosity 
profiles and rotation curves are derived using consistent centers, position angles, and inclinations derived 
from the photometry and velocity maps. The distribution of mass is modeled as a sum of disk and bulge 
components with distinct, constant mass-to-light ratios. No dark matter halo is included in the fits. 

The models reproduce the overall structure of the rotation curves in the majority of galaxies, providing 
good fits to galaxies which exhibit pronounced structural differences in their surface brightness profiles. 
75% of galaxies for which the rotation curve is measured to R23.5 or beyond are well fit by a mass-traces- 
light model for the entire region within R23.5. The models for about 20% of the galaxies do not fit well; 
the failure of most of these models is traced directly to non-axisymmetric structures, primarily bars but 
also strong spiral arms. The median /-band M/L of the disk plus bulge is 2.4 ± O.Ohys in solar units, 
consistent with normal stellar populations. These results require either that the mass of dark matter 
within the optical disk of spiral galaxies is small, or that its distribution is very precisely coupled to the 
distribution of luminous matter. 



1. INTRODUCTION 

Extended H I rotation curves provide deeply compelling 
evidence for a dark matter component that dominates the 
total mass of spiral galaxies. However, the fraction of 
lunnnous to dark matter (L/D) within the optical disk 
(within the 25 mag/arcsec^ i3-band, 23.5 mag/arcsec^ /- 
band isophote) is very poorly known. Typically, extended 
rotation curves have no distinct features which might re- 
flect the end of the luminous disk (Bahcall & Casertano 
1985). As a consequence, they provide virtually no con- 
straint on L/D within the optical disk. Mass models in 
which the dark component dominates the inner mass dis- 
tribution generally fit the rotation curves within the opti- 
cal disk as well as models with a negligible dark component 
(van Albada & Sancisi 1986, Lake & Feinswog 1989). 

The mass and luminosity of spiral galaxies are, however, 
very strongly connected. Spiral galaxies exhibit a very 
tight, one parameter relation between rotational velocity 
and luminosity, the Tully-Fisher (TF) relation (TuUy & 
Fisher 1977, see Jacoby et al. 1992 for a review). The to- 
tal mass-to-light ratio (M/L) within the optical disk is re- 
markably uniform among all spirals (Rubin 1985, Roberts 
& Haynes 1994) including low surface brightness spirals 
(Sprayberry et al. 1995). Indeed, the typical value of 
M/L (we derive here (M/L)/ = 2.4±0.9) is consistent with 



that expected from normal stellar populations (Larson & 
Tinsley 1978, Bruzual & Chariot 1993, Worthey 1994), 
with no dark matter. Optical rotation curves are not, in 
general, fiat and featureless. They span a range of shapes 
from linearly rising to falling with radius (Rubin 1985) and 
also display smaller scale "bumps and wiggles" (Freeman 
1992). Mass models fitted to rotation curves within the 
optical disk rarely require dark matter halos to yield good 
fits (Kalnajs 1983, Kent 1986, Buchhorn 1992). These 
models generally reproduce the large scale features and 
sometimes reproduce the smaller scale "bumps and wig- 
gles" in the optical rotation curves. 

Dynamical arguments suggest that the inner regions of 
spirals cannot be dominated by dark matter. Within the 
optical radius, a dark matter halo with an average pro- 
jected surface mass density greater than that of the disk 
would act to suppress common instabilities such as bars 
and 2-arm spiral structure (Athanassoula et al. 1987). 
The existence of lopsided modes, which appear in many 
disk galaxies (Rix & Zaritsky 1995), may require even 
lower halo mass densities. A bulge or thick disk also act to 
stabilize the disk, further lowering the allowed dark mat- 
ter density. It is possible to contsruct a model disk galaxy 
with an almost flat rotation curve which is stable with no 
dark matter (Sellwood & Evans 2000). This reverses the 
disk-stability argument Ostriker & Peebles (1973), which 



^ Visiting Astronomer, Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory. CTIO is operated by AURA, Inc. under contract to the National Science 
Foundation. 

2 NASA/NRC Resident Research Associate 



is often used to support the need for a massive dark mat- 
ter halo within the optical radius. Of course, spherical 
halo mass outside the optical radius has no effect on disk 
stability. A stellar bar would also interact with a massive 
halo through dynamical friction. For large dark matter 
densities this interaction acts to rapidly slow the pattern 
rotation speed of the bar (Weinberg 1985, Debattista & 
Sellwood 2000) far below that expected in real galaxies 
(Sellwood & Wilkinson 1993), or measured in any galaxy 
(Merrifield & Kuijken 1995, Gerssen, Kuijken & Merrifield 
1999) 

Simulations of galaxy formation through dissipationless 
collapse of matter yield strongly triaxial halos (Dubinski 
& Carlberg 1991, Warren et al. 1992) , which produce 
non-axisymmetric disks if the halo dominates the inner 
mass density. Adding a dissipational gaseous component 
to these simulations leads to rounder, but still triaxial ha- 
los (Katz & Gunn 1991, Dubinski 1994). The intrinsic 
ellipticity and non-circular motions of these disks would 
produce large scatter in the TF relation (Franx & de Zeeuw 
1992) which is not observed. This limits either the halo tri- 
axiality to less than that predicted by any of the formation 
models, or the mass of dark matter within the optical disk. 
The shapes of the gravitational potentials of dark matter 
halos for two galaxies have been determined through dy- 
namical models of a polar ring (Sackett et al. 1994) and 
the flaring of H I gas (Oiling 1996). Both of these studies 
suggest that halos have very flat mass distributions, with 
axis ratios between 0.1 and 0.3, and thus resemble a disk 
more closely than a sphere. 

The various evidence discussed above strongly suggest 
that the luminous component contains a dynamically sig- 
nificant fraction (> 1/2) of the mass in the inner regions of 
spiral galaxies. However, most rotation curves (see Caser- 
tano & van Gorkom 1991) for two possible counter exam- 
ples) show no significant change in the transition between 
this inner region and the outer, dark matter dominated 
region. The disk and halo must somehow conspire to hide 
this transition (van Albada & Sancisi 1986). Moreover, 
because of the low scatter in the TF relation and in M/Ls, 
the disk-halo conspiracy must act consistently among all 
spiral galaxies to couple tightly the evolutionary history 
and the present structure of luminous disks and dark ha- 
los. This is extremely surprising, because after the initial 
collapse the evolution of the halo and disk proceed on dif- 
ferent scales and through different and complex physical 
processes which are linked only through a weak gravita- 
tional coupling. 

All of the above considerations led van Albada and San- 
cisi (1986) to advance the maximum disk hypothesis. Un- 
der this hypothesis, the mass of the luminous disk in a spi- 
ral galaxy is assumed to be as large as possible, consistent 
with the galaxy's rotation curve. The mass contribution 
of the dark matter halo is therefore assumed negligible in 
the inner parts of spirals. 

A maximal disk does not eliminate the disk-halo con- 
spiracy, in a sense, it makes it more puzzling because it 
minimizes the overlap in the distribution of dark and lumi- 
nous matter. However, it does make the tight correlation 
between mass and luminosity in the inner parts of spirals 
more plausible. 



Not all lines of evidence support the maximum disk hy- 
pothesis. Kuijken & Gilmore (1991) quote a local Galactic 
surface mass density, derived from the velocity dispersion 
of K dwarfs, which is 30% higher than that of "identified" 
matter. Cosmological N-body simulations of hierarchical 
universes yield halos which are not well approximated by 
isothermal spheres with cores (Dubinski & Carlberg 1991, 
Warren et al. 1992, Navarro et al. 1996). The mass den- 
sity profiles of these simulated halos have slowly changing 
logarithmic slopes and continue to rise all the way into the 
centers. The central mass concentration of these simulated 
halos would seem to be inconsistent with a maximum disk. 

In this work we model the luminous mass distribution 
for a sample of 74 spiral galaxies. Our aim is to test the 
maximum disk hypothesis by analyzing how well features 
in the rotation curve are reproduced by the mass mod- 
els. We therefore do not include a dark halo in the fits, 
but rather evaluate the quality of the fits under the strict 
maximum disk hypothesis. We extract surface bright- 
ness profiles for the disk and bulge from /-band images 
of normal spiral galaxies and derive optical Ha rotation 
curves from Fabry-Perot velocity maps with two spatial 
dimensions. The optical radius is defined as the radius to 
the extinction corrected 23.5 mag arcsec"^ isophote in /. 
The Fabry-Pcrot maps provide high signal-to-noise rota- 
tion curves, and enable us to average over local kinematic 
features. We fit axisymmetric mass models to optical rota- 
tion curves assuming constant, but distinct, mass-to- light 
ratios for the disk and bulge. The two dimensional infor- 
mation provided by the photometric images and velocity 
maps allows us to assess the importance of nonaxisymmet- 
ric features. This will be fully explored in a future paper. 

2. THE data/sample 

Our sample consists of 74 field and cluster spirals in the 
vicinity of the Hydra-Centaurus cluster. For each galaxy 
in the sample we have an /-band image and a two di- 
mensional Ha velocity map. Sixty-one galaxies are taken 
from Schommer et al. (1993) (SBWM). The observations 
and preliminary reductions of the data for these galaxies 
are described there. Observations and reductions for 13 
additional galaxies are presented in this paper. The sam- 
ple includes galaxies which are members of the clusters: 
Antha(6), Hydra(12), Centaurus(16), and Klemola 27 (5) 
(see Table 1). 

/-band CCD images were taken on March 15, 1994 with 
the CTIO 0.9m telescope at the Cassegrain focus. The 
detector was a TEK 1024 with a scale of 0.39"/pixel. The 
exposure time for each image was 10 minutes. Typical 
seeing was ~1.5". The images were bias subtracted and 
flatfielded with twilight skyflats using IRAF"^ . A large frac- 
tion of the SBWM images were taken with a TI 800x800 
CCD which had large, 1.5%, Hatfield errors. The errors 
were large scale and primarily near the edges of the field 
which made precise sky estimation difficult and created 
significant distortions at low surface brightness. An illu- 
mination correction was constructed for the TI images by 
combining all 40 /-band images from the run. For each im- 
age the galaxy and stars were removed and the remaining 
pixels were scaled by the sky level. The resultant image 
was smoothed over a scale of 20 pixels. The corrected 



IRAF is distributed by NOAO, which is operated by AURA Inc., under contract to the NSF. 



images are flat to 0.2%. 

All the images were calibrated using Graham standards 
(Graham 1982). The instrumental magnitudes of the 
standards were determined using DAOPHOT II (Stetson 
1987). DAOPHOT was also used to automatically locate 
cosmic rays and stars in the galaxy images. Stars and cos- 
mic rays were distinguished using the DAOPHOT sharp- 
ness parameter. The cosmic rays were removed by replac- 
ing affected pixels with the biweight of surrounding pixels 
(the biweight is an robust estimate of the mode of a dis- 
tribution which is optimized for small samples (see Beers 
et al. 1990). The stars were removed by flagging pixels in 
a circular aperture centered on each star. 

Ha spectroscopy for each galaxy was obtained in April 
1993 with the CTIO 1.5m telescope and the Rutgers 
Fabry-Perot imaging spectrophotometer. A TEK 512 
CCD with a 1.09"/pixel scale was used. The observations 
for each galaxy consist of 8 to 15 images with a 110 km s^^ 
FWHM bandpass (2.4 A at Ha), spaced at 1 A intervals to 
sample the Ha emission line. Wavelengths were calibrated 
during the day. Calibration drifts during the night were 
monitored by taking exposures of a neon lamp every hour. 
The maximum drift rate was 0.1 A/hr. The images were 
bias subtracted and flatfielded, with dome flats taken near 
the wavelength of each image, using IRAF. Typical seeing 
was ^1.5". 

Transparency and instrumental throughput variations 
were measured by performing photometry on stars com- 
mon to all the images for each galaxy using DAOPHOT. 
Cosmic rays were removed using the procedure described 
above. The images were convolved with a Gaussian to 
compensate for variations in seeing. The stellar positions 
were used to establish transformations and the images 
were shifted to a common coordinate system. The sky 
in each frame was determined in an annulus centered on 
the galaxy. There was generally no observable wavelength 
dependent structure in the the sky over the small 6 A 
gradient across Fabry-Perot field of view at the observed 
wavelengths. The series of images yields, at each pixel, a 
short segment of the spectrum around Ha. The spectra 
have been fitted with Voigt profiles (Humlicek 1979) to 
yield maps of the velocity, velocity dispersion. Ha inten- 
sity, continuum intensity, and their respective uncertain- 
ties. The kinematic data extends to a median of 4 disk 
scale lengths or 1.1 R23.5 in /. We used stars in each of 
the images to find relative astrometric corrections between 
the photometric and kinematic images. 

3. SPIRAL GALAXY MODELS 

We derive axisymmetric mass models of spiral galax- 
ies assuming that the radial mass distribution follows the 
radial luminosity distribution with constant M/L. The as- 
sumption of constant M/L requires that extinction and 
population gradients be small across the luminous disk, 
which may not be an adequate representation of real galax- 
ies, de Jong (1995) finds significant color gradients in the 
profiles of a large sample of spiral galaxies. His analy- 
sis attributes these gradients primarily to changes in stel- 
lar populations, with younger, more metal poor stars at 
large radii. This would tend to lower the stellar M/L at 
large radii and, therefore, decrease the radius at which the 
"missing mass" becomes important, de Jong's models pre- 



dict that (M/L)/ can change by a factor of 1.5 from the 
inner to outer parts of spirals. However, his models pre- 
dict a scatter of ~ 1.5 mag in the /-band TuUy-Fisher and 
a smaller scatter in color bands redder than /. Neither of 
these predictions are in agreement with observations. The 
large scatter is not observed and an analysis of the TF 
relation shows larger scatter both at visible color bands 
(Bothun & Mould 1987) and in the near infra-red (Bern- 
stein et al. 1994) than at /. These issues clearly need to 
be resolved, but in the absence of specific predictions for 
variable M/L we adopt a constant M/L for our models. 

We assume that luminous parts of spiral galaxies are 
composed of two principal components: a fiat disk and a 
rounder bulge. Each component is characterized by a dis- 
tinct spatial and kinematic stellar distribution, and stel- 
lar population. In addition, the disk harbors the cold gas. 
Our models are based on a two component, disk and bulge, 
photometric decomposition. To derive the mass distribu- 
tion we assume that each component has a separate, con- 
stant M/L. In real galaxies, the disk and bulge can be 
further divided into subcomponents such as the thin and 
thick disk, and nucleus; these are not considered here. The 
thick and thin disks in external galaxies have been distin- 
guished only in edge-on projections (Burstein 1979) and 
the nuclei are not resolved in our data. 

Spiral galaxies are approximately axisymmetric; the ax- 
isymmetry is broken by bars and spiral structure. Our 
models assume strict axisymmetry. The surface brightness 
profiles and the rotation curves for each galaxy are derived 
with a fixed and consistent center, position angle and incli- 
nation which we derive from both the photometry and the 
kinematic data. The difference in the projected disk and 
bulge axis ratios is taken into account in the disk-bulge de- 
composition. In this analysis there is no radial dependence 
of the geometric parameters. Such a dependence is often 
implicit in isophotal or kinematic tilted-ring analysis. 

Our goal is to examine how well maximum disk mod- 
els reproduce the mass distribution in a large and diverse 
sample of spiral galaxies. Individual models with halos 
could be constructed but would be poorly constrained by 
our data. 

In sections 3.1 and 3.2 we present our photometric and 
kinematic models. The 2-D nature of our data set allows us 
to derive independent geometric parameters from both the 
photometric images and the kinematic maps (SBWM). In 
section 3.3 we combine these results to derive a luminosity 
distribution and rotation curve with consistent geometric 
parameters. In section 4.3 we present the mass models. 

3.1. Photometric Models 

The goal of the photometric models is to separate the 
disk and bulge and deduce their radial luminosity distri- 
butions. The two primary features we use to distinguish 
the disk from the bulge in an image are the difference in 
the radial surface brightness profile and the axis ratio of 
the isophotes. 

The surface brightness profiles of most spiral galaxies are 
exponential over some fraction of the disk (Freeman 1970). 
Approximately 40% of spirals, however, deviate strongly 
from purely exponential disks. These spirals, designated 
as type II by Freeman, have profiles that are flat or slowly 
rising toward the center and have a steeper exponential 



outer profile. The profiles of type I galaxies more closely 
follow the canonical exponential disk. The profiles of disk 
galaxies often also exhibit smaller scale deviations. In or- 
der to model fully the radial structure of the disk these 
features must be included. We use an exponential com- 
ponent for the disk in our disk-bulge decomposition, but 
the final model for the disk is taken as the radially binned 
surface brightness profile of the galaxy after subtracting 
the bulge model. 

The bulges of spiral galaxies arc three-dimensional 
structures. This leads to the difference in axis ratios of 
the disk and bulge isophotes in the projected image of an 
inclined spiral. The isophotes of the bulge are typically 
not circular, and thus bulges arc typically not spherical. 

3.1.1. Disk-Bulge Decomposition 

There have been two strategies for performing disk- 
bulge decompositions. One has been to first perform 
an isophotal analysis; the resulting radial luminosity pro- 
file is fitted with an exponential disk and a bulge model 
(Schombert & Bothun 1987) such as the R^ law (de Vau- 
couleurs 1948) or Plummcr model. The second method, 
due to Kent (1986), uses the geometric properties of the 
disk and bulge. 

The profiles derived from isophotal fits are functions of 
up to five variables at each isophote: semi-major axis, el- 
lipticity, position angle and center coordinates. The de- 
pendence on the last four variables, while included in the 
fits, is often not presented. This dependence leads to dis- 
tortions in the radial luminosity profile which arc not in 
the underlying radial light distribution. The geometric 
parameters can be distorted locally by bright star forming 
regions. Unavoidably, the the parameters have a radial 
dependence that follows a bar and/or spiral arms. The 
isophotes are not well approximated by ellipses in the 
region where the surface brightness changes from bulge 
dominated to disk dominated. An elliptical isophote fit- 
ter makes a compromise fit which biases the true radial 
profile. For example, in a highly inclined galaxy with a 
compact nearly spherical bulge, the surface brightness of 
the bulge projects to large galactic radii along the minor 
axis. An elliptical isophote fitter will produce a profile 
in which the bulge seems to extend to larger radii. This 
will bias bulge models such as the R^ or Plummcr model 
which have strong tails. Byun & Freeman (1995) present 
a systematic study of these effects in model galaxies. 

The method of disk-bulge decomposition developed by 
Kent uses the different radial scaling properties of the disk 
and bulge profiles along the major and minor axes. The 
method relies on the different axis ratios of disk and bulge 
isophotes and the assumption of axial symmetry. The dis- 
advantage of this method is that it uses information only 
near the major and minor axis and is, therefore, sensitive 
to non-axisymmetric structure in these regions. 

Our method combines the best properties of these two 
methods by using the full two-dimensional information in 
the galaxy image. We fit two-components, a disk and a 
bulge model, to the image of the galaxy. We assume that 
the underlying distribution of light in spiral galaxies is 
axisymmetric, with a thin disk and an oblate spheroidal 
bulge with constant axis ratio. Under this assumption 
the projected isophotes of the model disk are ellipses with 



constant axis ratio, position angle and center. The pro- 
jected isophotes of the model bulge are ellipses with the 
same position angle and center as the disk but a differ- 
ent, larger, axis ratio. We exploit the exponential form 
of the disk but do not constrain ourselves to a more spe- 
cific functional form for the bulge. For the bulge we use a 
series expansion of Gaussians (Bendinelli 1991) which we 
have generalized to model oblate distributions. At large 
radii the surface brightness of this bulge model is always 
negligible compared to the disk. 

The disk and bulge are separated in three steps: (1) an 
exponential disk model is fitted to and subtracted from 
the image, (2) the bulge model is fitted to the resultant 
image, and (3) the bulge model is subtracted from the 
original image leaving an image of the disk. The exponen- 
tial disk of step 1 is fitted in a region well away from the 
bulge and extrapolated into the central bulge dominated 
region. The extrapolation is carried out in different ways 
for type I and type II disks (see below). The purpose of 
fitting the exponential disk model is to derive a global in- 
clination, position angle, and scale length and to provide a 
reasonable extrapolation of the disk into the central bulge 
dominated region for the purpose of isolating the bulge 
fight. 

For type I disks the galaxy image is divided into two 
regions; the disk dominated region and the central bulge 
dominated region. The disk dominated region is defined 
as an elliptical annulus centered on the galaxy: the inner 
edge of this annulus has axis ratio of the bulge isophotes 
and the outer edge has the axis ratio of the disk isophotes. 
The semi-major axis of the inner edge of the annulus is 
set sufficiently far from the center that the bulge is negli- 
gible compared to the exponential disk. The bulge dom- 
inated region is defined as an elliptical disk centered on 
the galaxy with the axis ratio of the bulge isophotes. The 
semi-major axis of each division is determined from a plot 
of the surface brightness binned in elliptical annuli with 
the approximate axis ratio of the disk. We fit a projected 
exponential disk to the image of the galaxy in the disk 
dominated region: 

l^o{a.^)^^^^e-''n/^n^ (1) 

where ii^ is central surface brightness, r^ is the disk scale 
length, and a^-, is the length of the semi-major axis of a 
ellipse of constant surface brightness for the disk. In gen- 
eral 

a^ = R'^{l+fsin'^{(l)-(f)o)) (2) 

where f^ — (-)^^ — 1 is defined in terms of the axis ratio, 
-, _R is the distance from the galaxy center as measured 
on the sky and 0o is the position angle of the major axis. 
For a flat disk the inclination is given by i = cos^^(-). 

The exponential disk is subtracted from the galaxy im- 
age and a bulge model is fitted in the bulge dominated 
region. The bulge model is a series of Gaussians: 



fJ-sias) = 



fc=i ' 



J^^-</< 



(3) 



where Ck is the total light in each component, r^ is the 

scale length of the fc*'* Gaussian component and a^ is the 
length of the semi-major axis of an ellipse of constant sur- 
face brightness for the bulge. Each Gaussian has a com- 
mon center and axis ratio. The position angle is fixed at 



the value derived for the disk, as required by the assump- 
tion of axisymmetry. Bulges are fitted with between 1 and 
6 Gaussian components. We use the maximum number 
of components that gives a unique and stable fit. If we 
add additional components we find either that: multiple 
components converge to the same scale length, with each 
of these components contributing a fraction of the inten- 
sity, or that the scale length of an additional component 
diverges and the intensity is reduced to the point that the 
component contributes a negligible constant offset. We 
have found that many of the standard fitting laws for the 
bulges of spiral galaxies such as de Vaucoulcurs or Plum- 
mer models are inadequate representations of real bulge 
images. The bulge model is subtracted from the original 
galaxy image, and the residual image is binned in ellip- 
tical annuli to arrive at the final disk model. To avoid 
truncation features and to integrate total magnitudes we 
extrapolate the disk model to large radii using the param- 
eters of the exponential disk. 

For type II galaxies we divide the galaxy into 3 regions: 
the outer disk region, the inner disk region and the central 
bulge region. We fit an exponential disk in the outer re- 
gion to derive the ellipticity and position angle. We then 
fit an exponential disk in the inner disk region with its own 
intensity and scale length, but with the ellipticity and po- 
sition angle fixed at the value derived from the outer disk. 
Because the surface brightness is nearly constant in this 
region, the shapes of the isophotes are not well defined 
and the light distribution contains no information about 
the position angle or inclination of the galaxy. We subtract 
the inner disk model from the image and the bulge model is 
fitted in the central region as described above. The bulge 
model is subtracted from the original galaxy image and 
the residual image is binned in elliptical annuli to arrive 
at the final disk model. The disk model is extrapolated 
to large radii using the parameter of the exponential disk 
derived in the outer region. 

The disk-bulge decomposition is not generally iterated, 
except to adjust the border of division between the disk 
and bulge regions. The disk model near the center is a rea- 
sonable, but arbitrary, extrapolation. Attempts to make 
small improvements in the solution through iteration de- 
pend on the details of the assumed disk extrapolation. The 
advantages of our method are that it does not start with 
built-in biases of the isophotal surface brightness profile, 
and it sets additional, geometric, constraints on the disk- 
bulge decomposition and therefore exploits the available 
2-D information. 

3.1.2. 3-D luminosity distribution 

The three dimensional luminosity distribution of the 
disk is trivially related to the projected distribution. As- 
suming no internal extinction p^{r) = /i^(r)cosi S{z), 
where r is the distance from the center of the galaxy and 
S{z) is the Dirac delta function. The surface brightness 
decreases by a factor of cosi in the dcprojection. 

Under our assumptions the two-dimensional elliptical 
bulge surface brightness distribution can be uniquely de- 
projected to the three-dimensional spheroidal luminosity 
distribution via Abel's integral equations (Stark 1977). 
A two-dimensional elliptical Gaussian distribution de- 
projects to a three-dimensional spheroidal Gaussian dis- 



tribution. 



^^77r3(l-e|)T 



.-'^b/^'e 



(4) 



where a^ is the deprojccted semi-major axis of the 
spheroid. 



2,2 

a^ = X + y 



1 



l-e2 

B 

The ellipticity of the spheroid, 

e 1 



sm I 



(5) 



(6) 



follows directly from the galaxy inclination and the axis 
ratio of the bulge projected on the sky. 

3.1.3. Photometric Corrections 

The luminosity profiles are corrected for internal extinc- 
tion, Aint, and Galactic extinction, Ae^t- Corrections for 
internal extinction by dust generally give the total fraction 
of light absorbed within the galaxy. The surface bright- 
nesses of galaxies in this sample are derived by assuming 
the extinction is uniform over the luminous disk. The 
problem is, however, considerably more complex. The 
actual distribution of dust in galaxies is not well known 
and scattering may be as important as absorption in the 
I-band. Furthermore, multi-color photometry of spiral 
galaxies by de Jong (1995) suggests that radial color gra- 
dients may be due primarily to population gradients. 

We adopt Amt = — l.Olog(-) given by Giovanelli et al. 
(1994). Similar results are found by Han (1992), Bern- 
stein et al. (1994), and WiUick et al. (1995). Galactic 
extinction, Aext in the _B-band, is taken from Burstein & 
Heiles (1978). Reddening between B and / is assumed to 
be E(B-I)=0.45. The median value of Galactic extinction 
for this sample is 0.12 mag. 

3.2. Kinematic Models 

We derive rotation curves from two-dimensional Fabry- 
Perot Ha radial velocity fields. We assume that the Ha- 
emitting gas is in an axisymmetric rotating thin disk. In 
polar coordinates the model, projected on the sky, is given 

by 



w(r, (f)) = Vsys + Vcirc{r) sin i 



cosicos — 



1 — sin^ i cos^ ( 



'-^o) 



(7) 
where i is the inclination, (po is the position angle of the 
projected major axis, Vcirc{T) is the circular velocity pro- 
file and Vsys is the systemic velocity. The disk center is 
an implicit pair of parameters in the model. The term in 
brackets is equal to the cosine of azimuthal angle in the 
plane of the galaxy measured from the major axis. 

The parameters of the kinematic model are derived by 
fitting to the 2-D data in concentric elliptical annuli using 
a Levenburg-Marquardt x^ minimization technique (Press 
et al. 1992). The covariance matrix at the x^ minimum is 
used to estimate the errors in the parameters. The errors 
in the kinematic center are generally larger that those of 
the photometric center. The primary reason for this is that 



the kinematic center is poorly constrained along the minor 
axis and couples to the systemic velocity along the major 
axis. The center was therefore fixed by the centroid of the 
continuum distribution. In each annulus we fitted Vdrc, 4'o 
and i. The global kinematic position angle and inclination 
are the average, weighted by the estimated errors, of these 
parameters from each ellipsoid. The final rotation curve is 
extracted with all of the geometric parameters fixed. The 
rotation velocity is estimated independently on each side 
of the minor axis. 

3.3. Geometric Parameters 

The photometric and kinematic models yield indepen- 
dent estimates of the major axis position angle and the 
inclination. We merge these results and rederive the mod- 
els using consistent parameters. 

The position angle is generally better constrained by the 
kinematic models. A distinct line of nodes delineates the 
position angle in the velocity map, while the photometric 
position angle depends on the average distribution of lumi- 
nosity around an annulus. The photometric position angle 
is therefore more easily biased by global non-axisymmetric 
features such as spiral arms. 

The inclination, however is more poorly constrained by 
the kinematic model for many galaxies. For rising rota- 
tion curves the slope of the rotation curve and the inclina- 
tion are degenerate parameters. In the extreme case of a 
rigid rotator the degeneracy between the rotation profile 
and inclination is complete and there is no independent 
kinematic information on the inclination. SBWM found 
some galaxies with large deviations between the photo- 
metric and kinematic inclinations. The deviations are pri- 
marily for galaxies with rising rotation curves. 

We therefore determine the position angle from the kine- 
matic model and the inclination from the photometric 
model. The models are then iterated with the position 
angle fixed in the photometric model and the inclination 
fixed in the kinematic model. The final values of the geo- 
metric parameters are fixed and used consistently in both 
the photometric and kinematic models. The values are 
tabulated in Table 1. 



weighted average of the rotation curve points where the 
rotation curve becomes flat. For rotation curves which are 
still rising we define the width to be twice the maximum 
rotation speed. 

3.5. Mass Models 

We assume that the mass distribution of a spiral galaxy 
follows the de-projected luminosity distribution with con- 
stant M/Ls for each component. For the disk, we use 
a Fourier transform method for computing the rotation 
curve of a fiat axisymmetric mass distribution given by 
Kalnajs (1965): 



«Lc(") 



inhere u ~ \nr and 



1 

2^ 



-t-oo 



dpB{p)e 



jpn 



B{p) = 2TrGA{p) 
A{p)- 



r(i±2P)r(i 



2P) 
2 ) 



r(i^)r(i-Hf) 

-foo 



and. 



(8) 

(9) 
(10) 



where F is the Gamma function and j = \/— T. 

For a spheroidal mass distribution the rotation curve in 
the symmetry plane is given by Binney & Trcmaine (1987). 



,{r,z^O) ^AttGJI- 



p{a?)a^dd 
/^2 „ e-^a-^ 



(11) 



For a Gaussian distribution this integral reduces to a de- 
generate hypergeometric series in two variables. 

No dark halo is included. We also do not include a gas 
component. H I may contribute approximately 10% of the 
mass within the optical radius of late type spirals (Broeils 
& van Woerden 1994) and thus further lower the allowed 
mass of the luminous component. H I gas disks in spiral 
galaxies have longer scale lengths than the stellar disks and 
therefore contribute to the mass distribution primarily at 
larger radii where the rotation velocity due to the stellar 
disk begins to fall off. 



3.4. Galaxy parameters 

In Table 1 we list the photometric and kinematic param- 
eters for galaxies in the sample. After fixing the geometric 
parameters of the models, we derive values of the cen- 
tral surface brightness (So) and scale length (rj) for the 
disk. Dust extinction and projection effects are included 
in the models. We quote rj in the outer parts of the disk. 
For Freeman type II galaxies, therefore, the central sur- 
face brightness and scale length are not directly related 
quantities. The radius of the 23.5 mag arcsec"^ isophote 
(R23.5) is measured directly from the photometric profiles 
and, therefore, is also corrected for dust extinction (as- 
suming the dust acts uniformly over the disk) and projec- 
tion effects. The magnitudes for each galaxy are derived 
by integrating the disk profile and adding the total bulge 
luminosity. We quote total magnitudes integrated to in- 
finity. We calculate the ratio of the total luminosity bulge 
to that of the disk (B/D). 

We define the velocity width, used in the TuUy-Fisher 
relation, to be twice the rotation speed, measured by a 



4. RESULTS 

The model rotation curves of the bulge and disk are fit- 
ted to the kinematic data by adjusting the M/L of each 
component; the best fit is derived by minimizing x^- For 
most galaxies this results in a fit that nowhere significantly 
exceeds the data. For galaxies which would require a halo 
to get an acceptable fit we limit the radius of the fit so 
that the model rotation curve does not exceed the rota- 
tion curve data and evaluate the quality of the fit out to 
this radius. 

In Fig. 1 we present the models. The upper panel for 
each galaxy shows the face-on surface brightness profile. 
The contribution of the bulge is indicated by the dashed 
lines. The central surface brightness of the disk is marked 
with a diamond. The lower panel shows the rotation curve 
and the fitted mass model. The rotation speed for the side 
receding with respect to the center is marked with crosses 
and that for the the approaching side is marked with open 
circles. The rotation curves for the model bulge and disk 
are traced with dashed lines. The full model rotation curve 



is equal to the disk and bulge models summed in quadra- 
ture and is indicated by an unbroken line. In addition, 
the radii of prominent features, such as bars or rings, are 
marked with a vertical dot-dashed line. A scale bar in 
arcsec and the inclination are given to gauge the effect of 
seeing. 

4.1. Morphology of Surface Brightness Profiles 

In addition to the relative brightness of the disk and 
bulge, the surface brightness profiles of spirals can be clas- 
sified by the morphology of their disks. Two common as- 
sumptions are that spiral galaxies have an exponential disk 
and that they have a universal constant central surface 
brightness (Freeman's Law 1970). The discovery of low 
surface brightness galaxies (Bothun et al. 1991, Schombert 
et al. 1992, McGaugh et al. 1995) most clearly indicates 
that spiral galaxies fail the second assumption. The sur- 
face brightness profiles of disks are also not strictly expo- 
nential. The most prominent distinction in disk profiles is 
between Freeman types I and II, described in section 3.1 
Galaxy disks also frequently exhibit less extreme devia- 
tions from a pure exponential, such as a point of inflection 
where the scale length changes. 

One statement of Freeman's Law is that the ratio of 
the optical disk radius to the exponential scale length, 
R-23.5/rd, is a constant. In Fig. 2 we plot R23.5/rd vs. 
the central surface brightness. The tight correlation for 
exponential (i.e. type I) disks follows trivially from the 
definition of the optical radius and the the wide distribu- 
tion of central surface brightnesses in our sample. More 
significantly, R23.5/rd correlates with absolute magnitude 
(Fig. 3). We test the significance of this correlation with 
the Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient (Press et 
al. 1992). The correlation coefficient is —0.29. The prob- 
ability that there is no correlation is 0.01. The low lumi- 
nosity galaxies have lower central surface brightness and 
relatively flatter surface brightness profiles over the optical 
disk as indicated by a larger R23.5/rd. This leads to model 
disk rotation curves which rise more slowly for low lumi- 
nosity galaxies than those for high luminosity galaxies. 

4.2. Morphology of Rotation Curves 

Within the optical radius spiral galaxy rotation curves 
are not generally flat, but span a range of morphologies, 
from rising linearly to falling with radius (Rubin 1985, 
Persic & Salucci 1995). These authors also show that the 
shape of the rotation curves correlate with luminosity; low 
luminosity, small rotation velocity galaxies have rotation 
curves that are rising while high luminosity, large rotation 
velocity galaxies have falling rotation curves. 

An examination of the rotation curves in this sam- 
ple suggests such a trend, but a large range of rotation 
curve shapes is found at every scale of rotational veloc- 
ity. At high maximum rotation velocities (~300 km s^^): 
ESQ 374G02 (Fig. Iz) is falling, ESQ 375G12 (Fig. lac) 
is flat, ESQ 269G61 (Fig. li) rises over ~0.4R23.5 be- 
fore flattening, and ESO 381G51 (Fig. lai) rises over the 
entire optical radius. At low maximum rotation veloci- 
ties (~100 km s^i): ESO 374G03 (Fig. laa) is flat past 
~0.25R23.5, ESO 322G19 (Fig. Ik) is flat past -O.5R23.5, 
Abell 1644d83 (Fig. la) rises over the entire optical ra- 
dius. The rotation curve of ESO 441G21 (Fig. Iba) also 



rises to about 100 km s ^over the optical radius but does 
so almost linearly. 

4.3. Model Fits 

In spite of the variety of surface brightness proflle and 
rotation curve morphologies, maximum disk models with 
constant M/Ls provide good flts to optical rotation curves 
for a majority of the galaxies in our sample. The over- 
all structure of the rotation curves is reproduced by the 
models. The models fit the data for rotation curves that 
are rising linearly or with a curve, that are fiat or falling, 
or that have strong infiection points. The galaxies with 
good fits span a range of velocity widths (2wcirc) from 180 
km s-i for AbeU 1644d83 (Fig. la) to 680 km s^^ for 
ESO 572G17 (Fig. Ibv). For most of the galaxies no halo 
is required for the models to fit the data within the optical 
radius or to the last measured point. 

Fig. 4 shows the distribution of the ratio of the maxi- 
mum radius out to which the mass models provide a good 
fit to the optical radius; R/it/R23.5. The histogram is 
shaded for models which provide a good fit out to the last 
measured point of the rotation curve. 75% of galaxies for 
which the rotation curve is measured to R23.5 or beyond 
are well fit by a mass-traces-light model for the entire re- 
gion within R23.5. For 21% of the galaxies the models 
provide poor fits due to strong bars or spiral arms, these 
cases are assigned R/it/R23.5= in the histogram. The 
existence of strong non-axisymmetric structures suggests 
that there should be less dark matter in these galaxies. 
These cases are discussed below in section 4.4. 

For Freeman type I spiral galaxies, a thin exponential 
disk mass distribution has a rotation curve which reaches 
maximum at 2.15 disk scale lengths and falls slowly there- 
after, dropping 10% by 3.75 disk scale-lengths. Despite the 
apparent restriction of this shape, a wide range of optical 
rotation curve shapes can be successfully modeled because 
of the variation of the number of disk scale lengths within 
the optical radius among galaxies and the addition of a 
bulge component. 

Few galaxies have the canonical fiat rotation curve 
across the entire optical disk. ESO 375G12 (Fig. lac) and 
ESO 376G02 (Fig. lae) are two examples of galaxies with 
good fits that do. The optical radii in these galaxies span 
4.2 and 3.8 disk scale-lengths, respectively. The model 
rotation curve for ESO 375G12 begins to fall at the op- 
tical radius, but unfortunately, the rotation curve data 
for ESO 375G12 extend to only 3.3 disk scale lengths. 
ESO 376G02 shows slight evidence of dark matter, but 
only near the optical radius. The rotation curve for 
ESO 374G02 (Fig. Iz) has a gentle linear falloff over most 
of the optical radius and the model provides an excellent fit 
over this entire range. The optical radius of ESO 374G02 
extends over 4.1 disk scale lengths. These galaxies have 
prominent bulges. The flatness of the rotation curves is 
achieved though a combination of the bulge and disk ro- 
tation curves. 

ESO 383G88 (Fig. lam) and ESO 323g42 (Fig. Ix) have 
less prominent bulges. The rotation curves of these galax- 
ies rise less dramatically than those for the fiat rotation 
curves above, but do fiatten at larger radii. The op- 
tical radius of these spirals extend to 3.2 and 3.7 disk 
scale-lengths, respectively, and the models reproduce the 



turnover in the rotation curves. 

The optical disks of ESO 376G10 (Fig. laf) and ESQ 
501g01 (Fig. Ibl) extend to only 2.0 and 2.2 disk scale- 
lengths, respectively. These galaxies also have small 
bulges. The rotation curves reflect this morphology; they 
rise with a curve over most of the optical disk, reaching 
maximum near the optical radius. The rotation curve for 
ESO 501g01 extends significantly past the optical disk to 
4.1 scale lengths. The model rotation curve does not fall 
significantly below the data over this entire range. 

Freeman type II disks, which are distinguished by a flat 
inner surface brightness profile, are modeled with a con- 
stant inner mass density. This leads to rotation curves 
which are linearly rising over the constant density re- 
gion. The radius of the turnover varies from 20 to 60% 
of the optical radius for the galaxies in our sample. Ex- 
amples include: ESO 445G81, O.22R23 5 (Fig. Ibi); ESO 
375G02, O.23R23 5 (Fig- lae); ESO 216G20, O.3IR23 5 (Fig. 
Ic); ESO 501G86, O.55R23.5 (Fig. Ibp); and ESO 509G91, 
O.62R23.5 (Fig. lbs). The size of the linearly rising region 
in the rotation curve varies accordingly. 

ESO 381G51 (Fig. lai), ESO 435G26 (Fig. Ian), 
ESO 438G15 (Fig. law) and ESO 501gll (Fig. Ibm) also 
have flat surface brightness profiles near their centers; how- 
ever in these cases the profiles roll off slowly approaching 
an exponential asymptotically near the edge of the optical 
disk. The rotation curves in these cases rise slowly, with a 
curve matched by those of the models. ESO 435G26 has 
a strong bar and the fit within the bar radius is not good. 

The profiles of some spirals have inflections which are 
less prominent: the slope of the profile changes but does 
not become flat. This feature is reflected in the rotation 
curves of ESO 317G41 (Fig. Ij) and ESO 322G82 (Fig. 
Is). 

4.4. Nonaxisymmetric Structure 

A fraction, about 20%, of the fits fail in the inner re- 
gions; major structures in the model and/or rotation curve 
do not match up. These bad fits occur well within the op- 
tical disk and are not likely due to a dominant dark matter 
component. The galaxies which have the poorest fitting 
mass models often have strong non-axisymmetric struc- 
tures in the form of bars or strong spiral arm structure. 
These structures affect both the surface brightness pro- 
file and the rotation curve. The strong non-axisymmetric 
gas motions induced by a bar distort the measured rota- 
tion curve within the bar radius as noted for ESO 435G26. 
Strong spiral structure can affect the shape of the surface 
brightness profiles and induce large non-axisymmetric mo- 
tions as well as bias the determination of inclination and 
major-axis position angle. 

ESO 268g37 (Fig. Ig) and ESO 374g03 (Fig. laa) both 
have bars along the major axis and very strong spiral struc- 
ture. ESO 323g39 (Fig. Iw) has a bar along the minor 
axis and strong spiral ams. ESO 323g25 (Fig. lu) has 
very strong grand design spiral arms. The inclination of 
this galaxy, combined with the pitch angle and position 
angle of the spiral arms conspire in such a way that the 
arms closely follow the ellipticity of the disk from 5 to 10 
kpc. The large structure seen in the model at these radii 
is due to this chance alignment. This effect is also seen in 
ESO 322g36 (Fig. 11) and ESO 569G17 (Fig. Ibu) which 



also have strong spiral structure. 

A detailed analysis of the effect of strong non- 
axisymmetric structures will be presented in future paper. 
However, if a dark matter halo dominates the mass within 
the optical radius of these galaxies, it should act to stabi- 
lize the disk against these non-axisymmetric modes. It is 
difficult, therefore, to attribute the poor fit of these models 
to a large dark-to-luminous mass fraction. 

4.5. Small-Scale Structure 

Mass models for spiral galaxies sometimes, but not al- 
ways, reveal a correlation between small scale "bumps and 
wiggles" in the surface brightness profile and the rota- 
tion curve (Kent 1986, Freeman 1992). We find that in 
the two dimensional maps the residuals in the photome- 
try and the residual kinematic motions are highly corre- 
lated. How these structures show up in one dimensional, 
radial, surface brightness profiles and rotation curves de- 
pends strongly on how the data is sampled. The "bumps 
and wiggles" correlation is therefore most probably due 
to local perturbations, such as spiral arms and spiral arm 
streaming motions, rather than the global mass distribu- 
tion. 

4.6. Mass-to-Light ratios 

The median /-band M/L (disk plus bulge) for our sam- 
ple of galaxies is 2.4h75 in solar units with an rms scatter 
of 0.9. This accords well with the M/L predicted from stel- 
lar population synthesis models. If we exclude the galax- 
ies with the worst fits the median M/L rises to 2.7 ± 0.8. 
Worthey (1994) estimates that a normal stellar population 
which forms in a single burst will have an initial /-band 
M/L of about 1 in solar units and will increase to about 
5 over a time of 15 Gyr. His models have an M/L of 2.4 
at an age of 6 Gyr, and an M/L of 2.7 at 8 Gyr. Spiral 
galaxies are composed of stellar populations that span a 
range of ages and their M/L depends on the number of 
stars formed in each generation. A typical spiral might be 
about 10 Gyr old and form most of its stars over the first 
4 Gyr. 

The theoretical M/Ls are highly dependent on the as- 
sumed mass function for the stellar population and the 
details of the star formation history. Thus the agreement 
of our M/Ls with theory, although noteworthy, is not in it- 
self overwhelming evidence for the maximum disk hypoth- 
esis. The light comes primarily from a small population of 
bright, high mass stars, while the most of the mass is in a 
large population of faint, low mass stars. 

Current star formation rates vary with Hubble type, 
with lower rates in early type spirals. M/Ls increase over 
time as the stellar population fades, and therefore M/Ls 
should also vary with type, with higher M/Ls in early 
types. Such a correlation was found by Rubin (1985) and 
Kent (1986) for M/Ls in the F-band.' In the /-band this 
correlation is expected to be considerably weaker, and in- 
deed it is not strong in our data (Fig. 5). The stellar popu- 
lation models predict a rate of evolution of M/Ls in /-band 
that is a factor of two less than that in F-band for a given 
generation of stars. Also, the scatter in our M/Ls for a 
given type is large. 

The plot of M/L versus axial ratio (Fig. 6) is flat which 
gives us confidence that the assumed internal extinction 



law is correct and confirms the work of Han (1992), Gio- 
vanelli et al. (1994), Bernstein et al. (1994) and Willick 
et al. (1995). The good agreement of the values of M/L 
with the stellar population models also indicate that in- 
ternal extinction cannot be grossly higher, as claimed by 
Valentijn (1990). 

The scatter in the M/Ls in our sample is 37%. One 
of the primary sources of error is uncertainty in the dis- 
tance; measured M/Ls are inversely proportional to the 
assumed distance. The sample is concentrated in the great 
attractor region (Dressier et al. 1987), which is dominated 
by the Hydra-Centaurus superclustcr. The clusters are 
likely to have large peculiar velocities. Galaxies in the 
vicinity of the Centaurus cluster have a median M/L of 
1.8 ± .6 and galaxies near Hydra have a median M/L of 
3.4 ± 1. The Centaurus cluster is composed of two ma- 
jor sub-clusters (Lucey et al. 1986) and the Hydra cluster 
is also thought to have substructure (Fitchett & Merritt 
1988). The galaxies which are members of these clusters 
may therefore have especially large peculiar velocities. Fig. 
7 gives the distribution of M/Ls for the sample. Smooth 
Hubble flow is, unfortunately, not a precise approximation 
for estimating the distances to the galaxies in this sample. 
The large scale peculiar motions may contribute 25% or 
more to the error budget (Bothun et al. 1992, Mathewson 
et al. 1992, da Costa et al. 1996). This can also be seen 
in the TF relation for this sample. 

Figure 8 shows the TF relation for the galaxies in our 
sample assuming Hubble flow distances. We plot the to- 
tal magnitude with closed symbols for Freeman type I and 
open symbols for type II galaxies. We also indicate the 
R23.5 isophotal magnitude at the end of the line connected 
to each symbol. The length of the line indicates the ex- 
trapolation from the isophotal to total magnitude. The 
fainter galaxies clearly require a larger extrapolation; this 
is because the fainter galaxies have lower central surface 
brightness as noted above. 

If the slope of the TF relation is assumed to be near 6 
and we consider the total magnitudes (Mathewson 1992, 
Bernstein et al. 1994) then the scatter around the TF line 
is 0.46 mag. The zero point of the relation is fixed so that 
the average deviation from the TF line is zero (this as- 
sumes no bulk flow for the sample) . If the deviations from 
the TF line are attributed solely to peculiar motions, the 
error in the Hubble flow distances has a scatter of 24%. If 
the slope of the TF relation is assumed to be 10 and we 
consider isophotal magnitudes (SBWM, Peletier & Willner 
1993) then the scatter about the TF relation is 0.75 mag 
which implies deviations from the Hubble flow distances 
of 40%. 

5. CONCLUSIONS 

We find that spiral galaxy mass models which assume 
the maximum disk hypothesis yield good rotation curve 
fits within the optical radius, for a variety of spirals with 
distinct surface brightness and rotation curve morpholo- 
gies. 75% of galaxies for which the rotation curve is mea- 
sured to R23.5 or beyond are well fit by a mass-traces-light 
model for the entire region within R23.5. It is particu- 
larly striking that spirals with very different disk surface 
brightness profiles, generically distinguished by Freeman 
types I and II, are well modeled under the maximum disk 



hypothesis. 

Freeman type II galaxies constitute a significant frac- 
tion of spiral galaxies which fail to meet the canonical as- 
sumption that all spirals have an exponential disk. This 
has certainly contributed to the large discrepancy in disk 
scale lengths published by different authors for the same 
galaxies (Knapen & van der Kruit 1992). Type II galax- 
ies can be further characterized by the size of the inner 
fiat region and turnover rate. They span a large range of 
velocity widths and show no correlation with type. They 
generally break the correlation of rotation curve shape to 
absolute magnitude found by Rubin (1985) and Persic & 
Salucci (1995). 

Galaxies for which our models fail to give good fits in the 
inner regions, ^ 20% of the sample, generally have strong 
features, particularly bars but also strong spiral arms, 
which break the assumption of axisymmetry. Smaller scale 
deviations in the surface brightness profiles and rotation 
curves, "bumps and wiggles" , can also often be traced to 
nonaxisymmetric features. 

These results show that, within the optical regions of 
most spiral galaxies, the radial mass distribution is tightly 
coupled to the luminosity distribution. This is a much 
stronger constraint than that due to global correlations 
such as the TF relation. It implies that either the mass 
of dark matter must be small within the optical radius or 
that the distribution of dark matter must be precisely cou- 
pled to the distribution of luminous matter. A dark halo 
which is independent of, and unresponsive to the luminous 
disk cannot dominate the mass within the optical radius. 
A fraction of the derived luminous mass could be traded 
for halo mass, but the luminous mass traces the overall 
features of so many and various rotation curves that this 
fraction could not reasonably be too large. 

Persic and Salucci (1995) have constructed synthetic ro- 
tation curves by averaging over 500 optical rotation curves 
from Mathewson et al. (1992). They fit each synthetic ro- 
tation curve with model rotation curves for an isothermal 
halo and an exponential disk in which the scale length is 
fixed relative to the optical radius. They conclude that 
spirals galaxies with rotation velocities of 150 km s~^ are 
over 40% dark matter within the optical radius, and that 
galaxies with rotation velocities of 100 km s^^ are over 
75% dark matter. The assumptions which lead to this con- 
clusion are that all spirals galaxies have the same R23.5/rd 
and that all spirals of a given luminosity have the same ro- 
tation curve shape. Our results strongly suggest that both 
of these assumptions are too simplifying and call their re- 
sults into question. We find that R23.5/rd is larger in low 
rotation velocity galaxies. This leads to more slowly rising 
rotation curves. Relaxing only this assumption consider- 
ably weakens their dark matter constraints. 

Cosmological N-body simulations of hierarchical uni- 
verses suggest a universal halo profile for mass scales from 
ranging from dwarf galaxies to rich clusters of galaxies 
(Navarro et al. 1996). The halo profiles are centrally con- 
centrated and for spiral galaxies they dominate the mass 
distribution at all radii. In the cold-dark matter models 
of Navarro et al. , a galaxy with a maximum rotation ve- 
locity of 300 km s~^ is 72% dark matter within the optical 
radius, a galaxy with a maximum rotation velocity of 200 
km s^^ is 90% dark matter, and a galaxy with a maxi- 



10 



mum rotation velocity of 100 km s~^ is 96% dark matter. 
Our results show that optical rotation curves in real galax- 
ies exhibit a variety of shapes and that these shapes are 
well modeled by the luminous distribution of matter. It is 
difficult to reconcile our results with a universal rotation 
curve in which the central attraction primarily due to a 
dark matter halo. 

The success of the maximum disk hypothesis in model- 
ing the mass distribution in the inner parts of spiral galax- 
ies implies that either the mass of dark matter has to be 
small or that its projected distribution must follow pre- 
cisely that of the luminous matter out to nearly the optical 
radius. 



We thank Ben Weiner, Jerry Sellwood and Liz Moore 
for critical readings of this paper. We also warmly ac- 
knowledge the excellent support of the CTIO observing 
staff. This research has made use of the NASA/IPAC 
Extragalactic Database (Ned) which is operated by the 
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Caltech, under contract with 
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The 
Rutgers Fabry-Perot instrument was built with support 
from Rutgers University and from the National Science 
Foundation grant AST 83-19344. The RFP is operated 
at CTIO under a cooperative agreement between Rutgers 
University and the Cerro Tololo Interamerican Observa- 
tory. 



REFERENCES 



Athanassoula, E., Bosma, A., & Papaioannou, S. 1987, A&A, 179, 
23 

Bahcall, J.N., & Casertano, S. 1985, ApJ, 293, 7L 

Bahcall, J.N., Flynn, C, & Gould, A. 1992, ApJ, 389, 234 

Beers, T.C., Flynn, K., & Gebliardt, K. 1990, AJ, 100, 32 

Bendinelli, O. 1991, ApJ, 366, 599 

Bernstein, G.M., Guhathakurta, P., Raychaudhury, S., Giovanelli, 

R., Haynes, M.,P., Herter, T., & Vogt, N.P. 1994, AJ, 107, 1962 
Binney, J., & Tremaine, S. 1987, Galactic Dynamics (Princeton Univ. 

Prsss Priiicstoii) 
Bothun.'G.D., & Mould, J.R. 1987, ApJ, 313, 629 
Bothun, G.D., Impey CD. & Malin, D.F. 1991, ApJ, 376, 404 
Bothun, G.D., Scliommer, R.A., Williams, T.B., Mould, J.R., & 

Huchra, J. P. 1992, ApJ, 388, 253 
Broeils, A.H 1992, Ph.D Thesis, University of Groningen 
Broeils, A.H., & van Woerden, H. 1994, A&AS, 107, 129 
Bruzual A.G., & Chariot, S. 1993, ApJ, 405, 538 
Buchhorn, M. 1992, Ph.D. Thesis, Australian National University 
Burstein, D., & Heiles, C. 1978, ApJ, 225, 40 
Burstein, D. 1979, ApJ, 234, 829 
Burstein, D., & Rubin, V. 1985, ApJ, 297, 423 
Byun, Y.I., & Freeman, K.C. 1995, ApJ, 448, 563 
Casertano, S., & van Gorkom, J.H. 1991, AJ, 101, 1231 
da Costa, L.N., Freudling, W., Wegner, G., Giovanelli, R. Haynes, 

M.P., & Salzer, J.J. 1996, ApJ, 468, 5L 
Debattista, V.P. & Sellwood, J.A. 2000, astro-ph/0006275 
de Jong, R.S. 1995, Ph.D Thesis, University of Groningen 
de Vaucouleurs, G.H. 1948, Ann. d'Astrophys., 11, 247 
de Vaucouleurs, G.H. 1991, Third reference catalogue of bright 

galaxies (Springer- Verlag, New York) 
Dressier, A., Faber, S.M., Burstein, D., Davies, R.L., Lynden-Bell, 

D., Terlevich, R.J., & Wegner, G. 1987, ApJ, 313, 37L 
Dubinski, J., & Carlberg, R. 1991, ApJ, 378, 496 
Dubinski, J. 1994, ApJ, 431, 617 
Fitchett, M., & Merritt, D. 1988, ApJ, 335, 18 
Franx, M., & de Zeeuw, T. 1992, ApJ, 392, 47 
Freeman, K.C, 1970, ApJ, 160, 811 
Freeman, K.C, 1992, in Physics of Nearby Galaxies Nature or 

Nurture?, ed. T.X. Thuan, C Balkawski, & J.T.T. Van (Editions 

Frontieres), 201 
Gerssen, J., Kuijken, K. & Merrifield, M.R. 1999, MNRAS, 306, 926 
Giovanelli, R., Haynes, M., Salzer, J., Wegner, G., da Costa, L., & 

Freudling, W. 1994, AJ, 107, 2036 
Graham, J.A. 1982, PASP, 94, 244 
Han, M. 1992, ApJ, 391, 617 

HumUcek, J. 1979, J. Quant. Spect.Radiat. Transfer 21, 309 
Jacoby, G. H., Branch, D., CiarduUo, R., Davies, R. L., Harris, W. 

E., Pierce, M. J., Pritchet, C J., Tonry J. L., & Welch, D. L. 

1992, PASP, 104, 599 



Kalnajs, A.J. 1965, Ph.D. Thesis, Harvard University 

Kalnajs, A.J. 1983, in Internal Kinematics and Dynamics of Disk 

Galaxies, lAU Symposium No. 100, ed. E. Athanassoula (Reidel, 

Dordrecht), 87 
Katz, N., & Gunn, J.E. 1991, ApJ, 377, 365 
Kent, S.M., 1986, AJ, 91, 1301 

Knapen, J.H., & van der Kruit, P.C 1992, A&A, 248, 57 
Kuijken, K., & Gilmore, G. 1991, ApJ, 367, L9 
Lake, G., & Feinswog, L. 1989, AJ, 98, 166 
Larson, R.B., & Tinsley B.M. 1978, ApJ, 219, 46L 
Lucey J.R., Currie, M.J., & Dickens, R.J. 1986, MNRAS, 222, 427 
Mathewson, D.S., Ford V.L., & Buchhorn M. 1992, ApJS, 81, 413 
Merrifield M.R., & Kuijken, K. 1995, MNRAS, 274, 933 
McGaugh, S.S. Bothun, CD., & Schombert, J.M. 1995, AJ, 100, 573 
Navarro, J.F., Frenk, C.S., & White, S.D.M. 1996, ApJ, 462, 563 
OUing R.P. 1996, AJ, 112, 481 

Ostriker, J. P., & Peebles, P.J.E. 1973, ApJ, 186, 467 
Peletier, R.F., & Willner, S.P. 1993, ApJ, 418, 626 
Persic, M., Salucci, P., & Stel, F. 1995, MNRAS, 281, 27 
Press, W.H., Flannery, B.P., Teukolsky, S.A. & VetterHng W.T. 1992, 

Numerical Recipes (Cambridge University press) 
Rix, H.-W., & Zaritsky D. 1995, ApJ, 447, 82 
Roberts, M.S., & Haynes, M.P. 1994, ARA&A, 32, 115 
Rubin, V.C, Burstein, D., Ford, W.K., JR., & Thonnard, N. 1985, 

ApJ, 289, 81 
Sackett, P.D., Rix, H.-W., Jarvis, B.J., & Freeman, K.C. 1994, ApJ, 

436, 629 
Schombert, J.M., & Bothun, CD. 1987, AJ, 93, 60 
Schombert, J.M., Bothun, CD., Schneider, S.E., & McGaugh, S.S. 

1992, AJ, 103, 1107 

Schommer, R. A., Bothun, CD., Williams, T. B., & Mould, J.R. 

1993, AJ, 105, 97 (SBWM) 

Sellwood, J.A., & Wilkinson A. 1993, Rep. Prog. Phys., 56, 173 
Sellwood, J.A., & Evans, N.W. 2000, astro-ph/0006198 
Sprayberry, D., Bernstein, CM., Impey, CD., & Bothun, CD. 1995, 

ApJ, 483, 72 
Stark, A. A. 1977, ApJ, 213, 368 
Stetson, P.B. 1987, PASP, 99, 191 
TuUy R.B., & Fisher, J.R. 1977, A&A, 54, 661 
Valentijn, E. 1990, Nature, 346, 153V 
van Albada, CD., & Sancisi, R. 1986, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lon. 

A, 320, 447 
Warren, M.S., Quinn, P.J., Salmon, J.K., & Zurek, W.H. 1992, ApJ, 

399, 405 
Weinberg, M.D. 1985, MNRAS, 213, 451 
Willick, J.A., Courteau, S., Faber, S.M., Burstein, D., & Dekel, A. 

1995, ApJ, 446, 12 
Worthey C 1994, ApJS, 95, 107 



Table 1 



galaxy 


clust 


D 


Htypc 


Ftype 


m/ 


Mo 


R23.5 


rd 


B/D 


i 


</- 


log(2wo) 


M/Ld 


M/Lb 


M/L 






Mpc 


RC3 




mag 


mag///2 


kpc 


kpc 










km s^"'^ 











(1) 


(2) 


(3) 


(4) 


(5) 


(6) 


(7) 


(8) 


(9) 


(10) 


(11) 


(12) 


(13) 


(14) 


(15) 


(16) 



al644d83 


(a) 




e215g39 


b) 




e216g20 


c) 




e263gl4 


d) 




e267g29 


e) 




e267g30 


f) 




e268g37 


s) 


Cen 


e268g44 


h) 


Cen 


e269g61 


i) 




e317g41 


J) 




e322gl9 


k) 


Cen 


e322g36 


1) 


Cen 


e322g42 


m) 


Cen 


e322g44 


n) 


Cen 


e322g45 


0) 


Cen 


e322g48 


P) 


Cen 


e322g76 


q) 


Cen 


e322g77 


r) 


Cen 


e322g82 


s) 


Cen 


e322g87 


t) 


Cen 


e323g25 


u) 


Cen 


e323g27 


v) 


Cen 


e323g39 


w) 


Cen 


e323g42 


x) 


Cen 


e323g73 


y) 




e374g02 


z) 


Antlia 


e374g03 


aa) 


Antlia 


e375g02 


ab) 


Antlia 


e375gl2 


ac) 


Antlia 


e375g29 


ad) 




e376g02 


ae) 




e376gl0 


af) 




e377gll 


ag) 




e381g05 


ah) 




e381g51 


ai) 




e382g06 


aj) 




e382g58 


ak) 





79.62 


61.29 


77.85 


69.83 


76.23 


75.92 


68.50 


49.95 


69.40 


81.17 


45.23 


43.51 


55.99 


52.88 


44.19 


60.91 


64.28 


38.19 


65.84 


52.13 


59.76 


54.90 


69.90 


59.73 


69.63 


41.42 


43.22 


43.75 


42.86 


56.12 


59.44 


46.21 


46.01 


79.56 


70.72 


65.44 


06.20 



10 




14.42 


21.23 


7.32 


3.64 


5 




12.01 


19.74 


12.92 


4.20 


10 




12.07 


19.35 


13.46 


2.90 


3 




11.32 


18.54 


15.93 


3.60 


2 




11.84 


19.31 


15.86 


4.31 


3 




11.48 


19.77 


16.40 


4.98 


5 




12.39 


19.65 


12.50 


3.43 


3 




12.22 


18.87 


8.38 


1.91 


3 




10.81 


19.17 


24.00 


5.97 


2 




11.53 


18.89 


17.66 


4.19 


6 




12.64 


19.90 


8.10 


2.47 


4 




10.83 


19.06 


14.19 


3.50 


5 




11.91 


20.76 


14.57 


4.65 


5 




11.57 


19.79 


12.53 


3.71 


5 




11.52 


19.12 


10.36 


2.85 


3 




12.59 


19.94 


10.56 


2.87 


4 




11.97 


20.50 


12.22 


2.91 


3 




11.49 


18.84 


8.57 


1.71 


5 




11.05 


19.46 


19.16 


5.34 


3 




11.47 


19.87 


14.11 


4.52 


4 




11.34 


18.69 


14.27 


3.31 


5 




11.14 


19.98 


15.85 


3.76 


10 




13.35 


20.46 


9.35 


3.42 


10 




11.53 


19.57 


16.61 


4.44 


10 




12.44 


18.46 


9.47 


2.06 


3 




9.91 


19.08 


18.08 


4.42 


6 




11.51 


20.11 


13.20 


4.25 


3 




12.01 


19.17 


8.65 


2.15 


3 




9.28 


18.97 


27.64 


6.66 


5 




11.99 


19.83 


13.15 


3.54 


4 




11.35 


19.21 


14.68 


3.87 


8 




11.00 


20.85 


19.53 


8.12 


2 




10.72 


19.85 


17.35 


3.51 


10 




13.30 


19.35 


9.33 


2.42 


3 




11.44 


19.34 


15.18 


2.71 


10 




13.20 


19.60 


8.51 


2.33 


4 




11.21 


19.94 


32.75 


9.42 



0.06 
0.08 
0.09 
0.04 
0.12 
0.62 
0.08 
0.04 
0.03 
0.03 
0.00 
0.04 
0.05 
0.32 
0.03 
0.00 
0.30 
0.04 
0.11 
0.02 
0.01 
0.05 
0.07 
0.03 
0.02 
0.45 
0.03 
0.01 
0.12 
0.00 
0.16 
0.02 
0.12 
0.02 
0.12 
0.01 
0.12 



77 
50 
74 
60 
51 
55 
55 
62 
76 
71 
79 
53 
71 
68 
67 
76 
57 
70 
63 
80 
55 
58 
53 
69 
48 
52 
71 
64 
44 
80 
75 
76 
73 
41 
82 
54 
79 



278 

29 

306 

289 

313 

294 

120 

244 

253 

105 

300 

104 

42 

89 

308 

36 

259 

172 

8 

138 

283 

275 

265 

79 

358 

303 

149 

20 

309 

321 

159 

93 

58 

299 

58 

86 

153 



2.29 


3.00 


0.15 


2.84 


2.48 


2.16 


0.81 


2.06 


2.65 


2.42 


0.83 


2.29 


2.54 


0.92 


0.63 


0.91 


2.66 


2.94 


0.48 


2.68 


2.72 


4.32 


1.14 


3.10 


2.50 


2.33 


0.00 


2.17 


2.48 


2.04 


1.54 


2.02 


2.74 


2.59 


0.00 


2.51 


2.69 


2.43 


1.09 


2.39 


2.41 


2.06 


0.00 


2.06 


2.50 


1.28 


0.22 


1.24 


2.38 


1.47 


0.00 


1.39 


2.44 


1.69 


0.76 


1.46 


2.52 


1.73 


0.00 


1.69 


2.36 


0.99 


0.00 


0.99 


2.54 


2.34 


1.27 


2.09 


2.61 


3.61 


0.57 


3.49 


2.63 


2.28 


1.43 


2.20 


2.53 


2.40 


0.60 


2.37 


2.66 


2.61 


2.75 


2.61 


2.63 


2.53 


2.54 


2.53 


2.33 


2.02 


0.00 


1.89 


2.45 


1.71 


0.00 


1.66 


2.51 


1.13 


0.00 


1.10 


2.71 


2.63 


1.00 


2.12 


2.34 


1.45 


0.00 


1.41 


2.45 


1.73 


0.13 


1.72 


2.75 


2.19 


2.18 


2.19 


2.43 


1.95 


0.00 


1.95 


2.62 


2.48 


0.92 


2.26 


2.55 


3.92 


0.00 


3.86 


2.59 


2.40 


0.00 


2.14 


2.49 


2.25 


0.00 


2.19 


2.70 


2.92 


0.00 


2.61 


2.47 


3.28 


0.00 


3.25 


2.80 


4.32 


0.79 


3.93 



Table 1 
Continued 



galaxy 


clust 


D 


Htype 


Ftype 


ni/ 


Mo 


R-23.5 


fd 


B/D 


i 





log(2wo) 


M/Ld 


M/Lb 


M/L 






Mpc 


RC3 




mag 


mag///^ 


kpc 


kpc 




o 





km s^^ 











(1) 


(2) 


(3) 


(4) 


(5) 


(6) 


(7) 


(8) 


(9) 


(10) 


(11) 


(12) 


(13) 


(14) 


(15) 


(16) 



e383g02 


al) 




85.40 


5 




12.22 


19.76 


16.82 


4.87 


0.10 


60 


213 


2.58 


2.86 


2.29 


2.81 


e383g88 


am.) 




59.51 


4 




11.69 


19.78 


15.25 


4.77 


0.02 


67 


274 


2.55 


2.75 


4.00 


2.77 


e435g26 


an) 


Antlia 


40.32 


5 




10.13 


19.67 


20.33 


3.65 


0.06 


51 


117 


2.64 


2.76 


1.71 


2.71 


e435g50 


ao) 


Antlia 


40.60 


5 




13.53 


21.34 


5.55 


2.23 


0.00 


82 


70 


2.26 


2.08 


0.00 


2.08 


e436g39 


ar) 


Hydra 


51.25 


4 




11.81 


19.97 


11.39 


2.32 


0.29 


81 


82 


2.56 


3.62 


0.00 


2.80 


e437g04 


aq) 


Hydra 


48.10 


4 




11.76 


19.72 


10.84 


2.80 


0.06 


63 


320 


2.56 


2.65 


0.00 


2.49 


e437g30 


ar) 


Hydra 


54.24 


4 




10.89 


19.57 


19.05 


5.28 


0.12 


77 


124 


2.62 


3.06 


0.65 


2.81 


e437g31 


as) 


Hydra 


56.17 


7 




12.99 


20.37 


8.89 


3.12 


0.02 


52 


334 


2.38 


3.22 


0.00 


3.17 


e437g34 


at) 


Hydra 


54.83 


3 




14.25 


21.73 


5.32 


2.91 


0.04 


63 


77 


2.24 


4.58 


0.00 


4.42 


e437g54 


au) 


Hydra 


50.15 


3 




12.94 


20.35 


8.24 


2.84 


0.11 


83 


49 


2.46 


5.60 


0.24 


5.05 


e438g08 


av) 




124.3 


10 




12.66 


18.60 


14.27 


3.15 


0.18 


40 


89 


2.50 


0.90 


0.40 


0.82 


e438gl5 


aw) 




49.96 


4 




11.38 


21.06 


15.16 


2.87 


0.10 


71 


215 


2.53 


2.14 


2.31 


2.15 


e439gl8 


ax) 




122.20 


4 




12.09 


19.59 


20.99 


5.90 


0.30 


43 


276 


2.76 


4.15 


0.00 


3.20 


e439g20 


ay) 




59.84 


4 




11.84 


19.06 


12.28 


3.02 


0.08 


65 


281 


2.64 


3.46 


0.00 


3.21 


e441g22 


az) 




90.40 


4 




11.10 


20.19 


27.97 


7.50 


0.21 


73 


176 


2.77 


4.26 


1.07 


3.70 


e444g21 


ba) 




60.68 


10 




12.86 


21.67 


10.97 


6.44 


0.05 


84 


64 


2.36 


4.50 


0.57 


4.32 


e444g47 


bb) 




62.40 


6 




12.82 


19.63 


9.51 


2.71 


0.00 


71 


22 


2.44 


1.92 


0.00 


1.92 


e444g86 


be) 


K27 


58.18 


10 




11.56 


19.41 


12.93 


3.55 


0.20 


78 


252 


2.62 


2.86 


0.51 


2.46 


e445gl5 


bd) 


K27 


60.34 


10 




12.05 


20.26 


11.12 


2.51 


0.52 


66 


56 


2.58 


4.02 


1.14 


3.04 


e445gl9 


be) 


K27 


66.05 


4 




11.69 


19.35 


15.10 


4.32 


0.03 


67 


70 


2.60 


2.37 


0.51 


2.32 


e445g35 


bf) 


K27 


68.02 


3 




11.69 


18.96 


13.27 


3.38 


0.20 


42 


175 


2.76 


4.27 


3.44 


4.13 


e445g39 


bf) 




61.59 


3 




11.17 


18.65 


15.48 


3.58 


0.03 


61 


64 


2.78 


3.74 


1.49 


3.68 


e445g58 


bh) 


K27 


70.78 


4 




11.75 


19.24 


15.96 


4.05 


0.06 


63 


330 


2.60 


2.42 


0.03 


2.29 


e445g81 


bi) 




61.12 


4 




11.36 


19.76 


15.80 


3.60 


0.07 


79 


3 


2.67 


2.74 


0.00 


2.55 


e446g01 


bj) 




98.34 


4 




12.07 


19.63 


18.96 


5.27 


0.28 


53 


323 


2.63 


2.83 


1.01 


2.43 


e446gl7 


bk) 




58.52 


3 




11.05 


20.51 


18.87 


6.87 


0.30 


54 


148 


2.60 


3.11 


0.24 


2.45 


eSOlgOl 


bl) 


Hydra 


55.57 


7 




12.64 


21.12 


11.00 


5.06 


0.06 


55 


334 


2.39 


4.81 


0.00 


4.54 


eSOlgll 


bm) 


Hydra 


54.94 


7 




12.51 


20.46 


10.37 


2.46 


0.01 


81 


94 


2.41 


2.61 


0.00 


2.57 


eSOlglS 


bn) 


Hydra 


49.43 


1 




10.35 


19.44 


19.66 


5.24 


0.36 


60 


111 


2.75 


3.46 


2.47 


3.19 


e501g68 


bo) 


Hydra 


45.77 


10 




11.93 


21.27 


12.01 


3.99 


0.19 


70 


18 


2.54 


4.95 


3.28 


4.69 


e501g86 


bp) 


Hydra 


54.28 


4 




11.78 


20.84 


13.67 


3.07 


0.08 


60 


201 


2.52 


2.75 


0.49 


2.59 


e502g02 


bq) 


Hydra 


56.91 


3 




11.55 


18.85 


12.42 


2.90 


0.13 


63 


73 


2.64 


2.61 


1.31 


2.46 


e509g80 


br) 




92.86 


4 




11.86 


20.70 


20.29 


4.36 


0.14 


61 


171 


2.70 


3.95 


2.38 


3.75 


e509g91 


bs) 




72.29 


6 




12.70 


21.23 


13.61 


3.68 


0.09 


79 


131 


2.46 


2.96 


0.04 


2.71 


eSlOgll 


bt) 




81.13 


1 




11.84 


19.01 


17.65 


3.52 


0.13 


66 


64 


2.68 


3.02 


1.88 


2.89 


e569gl7 


bu) 




57.77 


3 




11.99 


18.29 


8.03 


1.69 


0.05 


45 


171 


2.55 


1.48 


0.19 


1.41 


e572gl7 


bv) 




93.44 







11.55 


18.76 


19.22 


4.56 


0.12 


48 


59 


2.83 


3.71 


1.76 


3.51 



13 

Table 1 Notes 

Column 1- ESO-Uppsala Catalog number for galaxies in the sample. The codes for Figs. 1 are also given. 

Column 2- Cluster membership. Cen^Centaurus. 

Column 3- Distance in megaparsecs assuming Hubble flow with respect to the cosmic microwave background frame, and 
Ho= 75 km s"i Mpc~^ 

Column 4- Hubble type in RC3 (de Vaucouleurs 1991). 

Column 5- Freeman type. 

Column 6- Total /-band magnitude. 

Column 7- Disk central surface brightness in /. 

Column 8- Major axis radius of the / = 23.5 mag arcsee^^ isophote in kpc. 

Column 9- Exponential disk scale length. We quote the scale length of the outer disk for Freeman type II galaxies. 

Column 10- Bulge to Disk luminosity ratio. 

Column 11- Inclination. 

Column 12- Major axis position angle measured North through East. 

Column 13- log of the circular rotation velocity width in km s^^. 

Column 14 /-band M/L of the disk in solar units. 

Column 15- /-band M/L of the bulge in solar units. 

Column 16- /-band M/L of the disk plus bulge in solar units. 



14 



AbeU 1644d83 (a) 



ESO 215G39 



(b) 



216G20 




2 






i = 50° 
1" 


- 


O 03 

o 


'^ 


V 




- 






\ 


^"^^^^^--..,^^ 


- 


s 






\ 


'^ 


i 












2 






1 iJtoJliP^' 


ttk 


- 


S 

5?g 






i ipptti'' » 


: 


S 


/ 


)L 


"" — — ____ 


— : 



r (kpc) 




ESO 263G14 



(d) 



ESO 267G29 



(e) 



ESO 267G30 



(I) 





' ■! ' ' 


, 




ring 


i . 60- 


U (O 
0) -- 


\ 










td o 


- \ l"'^-- 


-___^ ■ 








tt] 






S-s 


- \ 


^~~~^--~~. 


a.' 






S 


- \ 


- 






1 












'" 


iLi 


.duuM. 


,fil 




f2 


^0pn*f*- 


I "~ 


— .^i 


M 


iifft^ 




' J 


"S 


- j>*y 


: 


s 


/r- ^ 


- 




I' . .1 . 


t , , ■ 



r (kpc) 











i - 55* 


i 


V 1" 


a lo 


\ ^ 




\v 






Rt O 


V\. 


a 




^s 


\ ^"^^^"""---^ 


f 


\ ^"'"^^'-l-^ 


^ 




„ 






...... 












ullt 




. ..- 




JJ___^ 


f 




'k 


r~=^ 


s 


/I 









/ '~~ —■ 




' » 



7- (kpc) 



• (kpc) 



ESO 268G37 



(g) 



ESO 266G44 



ESO 26gG61 





T ■■'■■■■ ' 




"bar i . 66» 


r^ 


1" 






















"s 


aK. 










S-u 


- '\ ^'^""^^ 






a. 




S 


Q 




!'■■■. 










N 


' 










-i 


i 


. 






1 ?}!i - 


" f 






















■■\- 


"^ 


/-ir^"^ 









■\ 


S 


\fi^ ^ 


i' 




1 ^ •! 


9"^ 


- i/j 




~~~~^'~~~-~~-2 








/* : 


g 


/ ^ 



r (kpc) 




10 ,, , so 
r (kpc) 



Fig. 1. — Mass models. Top panels: /-band surface brightness profile. The bulge profile is given by the dashed line. The diamond indicates 
the disk central surface brightness. Lower panels: Maximum disk fits to the rotation curves. The dashed lines indicate the bulge and disk 
contributions. See text for a full description. 



15 



ESO 317G41 



ESO 322019 



ESO 322G36 / NGC 457S (1) 




r (kpc) 



r (kpc) 



r (kpc) 



ESO 322G42 



(m) 



ESO 322G44 



(n) 



ESO 322G45 



(o) 






................... 




i = 6B» 


V" 


1" 




^ " 










u 




«S? 


■ vv 










isi 


\ ^"---.^ 






a 




S 


\ ^"""%«i, 








.,, T . . , .[ 






















f 






1 1 


, 




/•>/ 






~- ■ 




1___^ 












/ > 


s 


;s' 


r ^ 




g 


/ ~" — - 






' t 



• (kpc) 



ESO 322G76 



(q) 















i - 57* 
1" 


CJ CO 
























"S 


- v.,^^^ 


- 














H 


- \"^^ 




i" 




^\.__^ 


s; 


- \ 


^-^-.^^ 






I 




■{ 












lU 


.Bitetji 


. slllllilif II 






r 




W»r' 




■■:'-4S 


:r 


-.^J 


=-o 


ip — ■ 










7 ^ 




1 


g 


J / "~~~ 


~~ — — — ■ 




/ 


. , . t . . , . . 




r (kpc) 
ESO 322G77 / NGC 4896A (r) 



• (kpc) 




Fig. 1. — Continued 



16 



ESO 332G62 / NGC 4679 (s) 



ESO 322G67 / NGC 4696C (t) 



ESO 323G25 




r (kpc) 



r (kpc) 



r (kpc) 



ESO 323G27 



(v) 



ESO 323G39 



ESO 323G42 



m 


. . .| . 


,....,...., 


p 


ring 


i = 58" 
1" 


DO) 


S 


" 




















«S 


.\^^, 


- 














&S 


- \ 


^^''--.-,...^^^ 


a.' 




^*""'**'""-'-^ 


S 


- \ 








^^<^■^ ~Hi-~ 




u 


I 1 


iOiffF mtH 


"==1"-^ 










1 


I }l !<> 












? 




■ 


S 


17^ 


■ 










/ T~ 


■ — ., 




' . . .\ . 


■ ....,...., ' 



r (kpc) 



ESO 323G73 




ESO 374G02 / NGC 3038 (z) 



r (kpc) 
ESO 374G03 (aa) 




r (kpc) 



r (kpc) 



Fig. 1. — Continued 



17 



I 375G02 / IC 2559 (ab) 



ESO 375G12 / NGC 3223 (ac) 



ESO 375G29 / IC 2578 (ad) 




r (kpc) 
ESO 376G02 / NGC 3333 (ae) 



r (kpo) 
ESO 376G10 / NGC 3347B (af) 



r (kpc) 



ESO 377G11 / NGC 3533 (ag) 







' 


, . . . 




1 




1" 


DO) 


\ 




" 










i. 


_K^ 














-5 N 


\ 


^~~~~~-,„^^ 














\ 




^"■-Xs^ 






^i&^^ 


Tf i j1 I 1 tI. 


ra 


'Ssti 


^fp*t«i:t 


tt mi\ ■ 


1 


Jjjfp 




|iHip<4^__ 


? 


// 






g 


T \ 




. 




/'/ 


^ 






' 


■" — . 






' 




. . t , . . . ■ 



r (kpc) 



ESO 381G05 








1 ■ ■ 






\ 


1" 




O ID 
















^S 


.\\ 


V^ 












S N 




\ ^""'-■-^^ 




















3. 




\ '"~ — ^ 


^ 
















, I, li 1 I 1 T 1 
















« 




ijt 


ffFf- 


+^ 


._[V 








W 



















r 




J-. ' 


^f - 


















>» o 




h T 




















/i 




S 




t . . 


■ 



r °kpc) 
ESO 381GS1 (ai) 



■ (fcpc) 



ESO 382G06 




r (kpo) 



r (kpc) 



Fig. 1. — Continued 



18 



ESO 382G58 (ak) 



GSO 383G02 (al) 



ESO 383G88 (am) 




ESO 435G26 / NGC 3095 (an) 



ESO 435G50 







■ f 




\ 


bar 1 - SI- 


o to 


\ 


" 














K, 


-K 


; 














&u 


- \ 


~~^^ 








a. 




^'^*'*^s^ 


S 


- \ 


, 1 ... .^ 


^ 




' f 


' 














n 


ii 




1 






i 


liil 




i' 


ill 




gS 




I' 


l|j|^ pf* 


(I 


11 


T 


P" 


? 




/^ 


'pr 11 1 








f\ 




' 


^ 




iV' 


I-- ___ 




i 


. 1 ~' 



r (kpc) 




ESO 436G39 



(ap) 









,....,.. 








1" 


U (O 








a) — 


^ 














"S 




\ 


\,,.^ 










^s 






\ ^~^-~--____^ 










a. 






\ ^^"->-.„_^_^ 


S 






1 1 1 ^ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 








I J 


r 






if 


i 


If 








I ^ft 


4i- 


T 1 






;^ 






■bsT'fl 


^ 




^ 






f 


Kl' 




















/■ 


( 


t 



T (kpc) 



ESO 437G04 




r (kpc) 



r (kpc) 



Fig. 1. — Continued 



19 



GSO 437G34 




r (kpc) 



r (kpc) 



r tkpc) 



GSO 438G15 (aw) 



ESO 439Gia 



(ax) 



ESO 439G20 



(ay) 




« 


bar 


i = 43 


• 


CO 






- 


s 






: 


!S 


W-- 




: 


Si 


\ 1 

1 1 'l 1 1 




-^ 


1 


- J'^ 


witl-t 


f^il 


■ 


« 


} 


1 




t- 






*/ ; 








§ 


■/ 






■ 




L . ,,, , 




. t .■ 







1 










i - 65' 

1" 


0) ^ 


\N 




- 


CJ 
















t- 




\^--,^ 


- 










^s 




\ 


~~~--^,„^^^ 


ar 




^~"~-»->,..^^^ 


Si 




, 1 , , , , 


^~^~^--^ 






,iiiiteti 


#f%ftL, 










" 




.iT 


-•m^,^^ 


f. 




if 


■ 


T< 




/ 






























i 


/i 


t. . . 



r (kpc) 



r (kpc) 



r (kpc) 



ESO 441G22 



(az) 



ESO 444G21 (ba) 



ESO 444G47 





i - 73' 

r 


^^■^~~---^ 


- 


\ 


^""^~-< 


■ , ,\ 


■ 






'& ■I^pj#*** 


jlfi^^ 


f'_^ 


. , . . t . ■ 



r (kpc) 




r (kpc) 



Fig. 1. — Continued 



20 



ESO 444G86 



(bo) 



ESO 445G15 



ESO 445G19 / IC 4319 (be) 









1 ■ ■ ■ 










i = 78" 




U CO 


^ 




- 
























u 










-s 


■ \^"-^ 






. 












£, N 


. \ 


















a.' 


\ 






'^ 






I ,* Vl 






o 


■ 1 !■ 


Ojlfe-fft 




- 


« 


1. 


,**f 


*^fll ft r 


?. 


■il 


f*n^ 




TiT 


"-=-«>..- 


■s 


// 


in 






























t: 


1 . . . . 


, . t . 


— : 



r (kpc) 




r (kpc) 



ESO 445g35 



ESO 445G39 / NGC 5298 (bg) 



ESO 445G56 (bh) 




T (kpc) 



Fig. 1. — Continued 



21 



ESO SOlgOl 




r [kpc) 
ESO 501G68 (bo) 



r (kpc) 
ESO SOlgSe (bp) 



10 5 ,10 , 16 

r (kpc) 
ESO 502GOS / NGC 3463 



(bq) 




r (kpc) 



ESO 509G80 / IC 4398 (br) 



r (kpc) 



ESO 509G91 / IC 4315 (bs) 



r (kpc) 



ESO 510G11 





........ 


' 


^ 




1" 


u o 


















u 


\ 




m" 


-V 


- 


^ss 


- \ 


"~~~"^ — ~„.,^^ 


a.' 




^■'*'^v,_^ 


S 


- \ 


- 




' 




" 




jiS— sL ■ 




ffji 


t -fJlMlliM-^^i 


iZ 

^ 


" jj|S#/ 




o 


/ r >-. 


















/ 







^ ...... . 


....!.' 



r (kpc) 




r (kpc) 



Fig. 1. — Continued 



22 



ESO 569017 / NGC 3453 (bu) 



ESO 572G17 / NGC 3969 (bv) 




Fig. 1. 



Continued 



23 



T3 



K 



o 


- 


1 1 


' ' 1 


1 


1 1 




1 ' ' 


1 1 1 1 1 1 


1 


- 




- 












o 


o 




- 




_ 















o 




_ 


5 


- 






o 
o 


° o 




o o 




• 


• 


- 


4 


- 









o 




o 

o 


•• 

J* 

-• • • 




- 




- 








o 




• 
• • • 


•o o 




- 


3 


- 




o 

o 

• 


o 
• 


• 
• 

•• 


• 


• • 

o o 






- 


2 


- 


1 1 


• 

, , 1 


1 


1 1 




1 , , 


1 1 1 1 1 1 


1 


- 



22 



21 20 19 

fj,,^ (mag arcsec"^) 



18 



Fig. 2. — Disk central surface brightness vs. R23.5/rd the sohd symbols are for exponential, Freeman type I disks and the open symbols are 
for Freeman Type II disks with a flat central disk profile. 



24 



X) 

ID 
Cvl 



o 


1 


1 1 


1 


1 


1 


III 


1 ' 


- 




- 










oo 




- 




_ 










o ° 




_ 


5 


- 








• 



• 


• 

o 

O 




< 


4 


— 






• 


o 

• 

•• 


• • • 

• • 




• 


— 


3 


[.. 


o 


^ 


• 
• 
• 


o 
• 


• 
• 


• 


- 


2 


1 


o 

1 1 


• 

1 


1 


• 

1 


1 1 1 1 


1 


- 


— 


L8 




-20 






-22 


-24 





M, 



Fig. 3. — Absolute magnitude vs. R23.5/i'd. The symbols are the same as in Fig. 2. The slope of the best fit least squares line is —0.37. 



25 




-■^fit/ ^^23. 5 



Fig. 4. — Histogram of R/it/R23.5- The shaded regions indicate galaxies that have good fits out to the last measured point. Cases where 
Rj^ij/R23.5= indicate galaxies which have poor fits due to bars or strong spiral arms. 



26 



0.8 



0.6- 



0.4 - 



60 
O 



0.2 



0- 



1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


' ' 1 


1 


- 








• 












o 


- 


" 








o 

• 








• 




• 


' 










• 


• 
8 








• 






~ 


• 






• 














~ 


- 




• 




• 


• 






• 




• 
o 


- 


- 




• 


• 




• 


• 

o 


o 






• 


- 


- 






• 


o 

§ 


3 


o 









o 


- 












S 










o 










o 


: 




8 


• 
g 


• 






• 
















• 


• 






• 




- 








o 




• 
• 








• 


- 


~ 








• 




o 


• 








~ 


- 










• 












- 


- 




















• 


- 










• 
• 
















- 




















• 


- 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 1 


1 1 1 


1 



-0.2 Q 



4 6 

Type (RC3) 



8 10 



Fig. 5. — M/L/ vs. Hubble type. The symbols are the same as in Fig. 2. The Hubble types, classified in the RC3 (de Vaucouleurs et al. 
1991), are coded; Sa=l, Sb=3, Sc=5, Sd=7, Untyped=10. 



27 



00 

o 



u.o 


1 


1 1 1 1 


1 


' 1 ' 


1 


1 1 1 1 1 1 


I 


1 




_ 












• 


_ 




- 


• 




o 


o 






• 


0.6 


: 


• 
• 


<d 




o 

• 


• • 




: 


0.4 


- 


• ••. 

a* 

o* o 
• 


• 
• 

0° 


• 
o 
• 
• 

• • 

• 
• 


• 
o O 
• 


• o ° 

o 
o O 

• 

• 




- 


0.2 


'_ 






° • . 








J 




- 


• 




• 


e 






- 




- 


• 












- 




- 


• 












- 





- 


• 


• 






• 




- 


-0.2^ 


1 


, , 1 , 


1 


, 1 , 


1 


1 , , . 1 , 


1 


1 


) 


0.2 




0.4 




0.6 0.8 







log(a/b) 



Fig. 6. — M/L/ vs. axis ratio. The symbols are the same as in Fig. 2 



28 



30 



20 



10 







T 1 r 



T 1 r 



T 1 r 



//, Centaurus 



Hydra 








2 4 

(M/L), 



6 



Fig. 7. — Histogram of M/L/. The hatched regions give the distribution of M/L in Centaurus and Hydra clusters. 



29 



T 1 r 



T 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 rr 

/ 
/ 
/ 



/ 



■24 



-22 



-20 



f / 



/ ? ,. 






T Vf>8' 



/ T 



I 



-18 



± 



2.2 



2.4 2.6 

log(2^^circ) 



2.8 



Fig. 8. — The TuUy-Fisher relation. The symbols arc the same as in Fig. 2. The symbols mark the total extrapolated magnitude and the 
lower points of the vertical lines mark the R23.5 isophotal magnitudes. The dashed line is the TF relation assuming a slope of 10, and the 
dotted line is the TF relation assuming a slope of 6.